The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a murder case, citing delayed FIR, silence in dying declaration, lack of criminal history, and pandemic constraints in jails, relying on Apex Court principles.Article 21 and larger mandate were weighed.
Accused to be released on personal bond with conditions regarding sureties and restrictions on tampering with evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6549 of 2020
Applicant :- Mukesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
It is submitted that First Information Report has been lodged after two months of the incident. The deceased is alleged to have died on account of burning caused by the applicant, who is brother-inlaw (Devar) of the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant referred to the dying declaration of the deceased wherein she has not made any allegation against the applicant or family members of her matrimonial home.She got burned by some burning object which fell on her and her elder brother-in-law(jeth) extinguished the fire after putting Gunny bag on her. Applicant alleges false implication. The First Information Report is delayed by two months.He is in jail since 11.8.2019 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact..
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Mukesh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 212 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C, Police Station-Neuriya , District- Pilibhit, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond
and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 13.7.2020 Atul kr. sri.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a murder case considering the delayed F.I.R., lack of allegation in dying declaration, and pandemic conditions in jails.
Whether the applicant has made out a case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶8
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukesh
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Siddharth
Parties & counsel
